July 27, 2004
DNC Opening Night Hits Homerun
It was an exuberant night of brilliantly crafted speeches at the Democratic Convention capped by one of the most dynamic speeches ever delivered, in my opinion, by former Pres. Bill Clinton. Following are excerpted paragraphs (with links to the full text) from key speeches which drove the Democratic message home.
And of course, no challenge is more critical than the situation we confront in Iraq. Regardless of your opinion at the beginning of this war, isn’t it now obvious that the way the war has been managed by the Administration has gotten us into very serious trouble?Wouldn’t we be better off with a new president who hasn’t burned his bridges to our allies, and who could rebuild respect for America in the world? Isn’t cooperation with other nations crucial to solving our dilemma in Iraq? Isn’t it also critical to defeating the terrorists? We have to be crystal clear about the threat we face from terrorism. It is deadly. It is real. It is imminent. But in order to protect our people, shouldn’t we focus on the real source of this threat: The group that attacked us and is trying to attack us again - Al Qaeda, headed by Osama Bin Laden?
Wouldn’t we be safer with a president who didn’t insist on confusing Al Qaeda with Iraq? Doesn’t that divert too much of our attention away from the principal danger? I want to say to all Americans this evening that whether it is the threat to the global environment or the erosion of America’s leadership in the world, whether it is the challenge to our economy from new competitors or the challenge to our security from new enemies, I believe that we need new leadership that is both strong and wise.
And we can have new leadership, because one of our greatest strengths as a democracy is that when we are headed in the wrong direction, we can correct our course. When policies are clearly not working, we can change them. If our leaders make mistakes, we can hold them accountable even if they never admit their mistakes. I firmly believe America needs new leadership that will make us stronger at home and respected in the world. We are here this week to present to the nation the man who should be our new president: John Kerry.
Today, our dominant international challenge is to restore the greatness of America -- based on telling the truth, a commitment to peace, and respect for civil liberties at home and basic human rights around the world. Truth is the foundation of our global leadership, but our credibility has been shattered and we are left increasingly isolated and vulnerable in a hostile world. Without truth -- without trust -- America cannot flourish. Trust is at the very heart of our democracy, the sacred covenant between the president and the people.When that trust is violated, the bonds that hold our republic together begin to weaken. After 9/11, America stood proud, wounded but determined and united. A cowardly attack on innocent civilians brought us an unprecedented level of cooperation and understanding around the world. But in just 34 months, we have watched with deep concern as all this goodwill has been squandered by a virtually unbroken series of mistakes and miscalculations. Unilateral acts and demands have isolated the United States from the very nations we need to join us in combating terrorism.
...In repudiating extremism we need to recommit ourselves to a few common- sense principles that should transcend partisan differences. First, we cannot enhance our own security if we place in jeopardy what is most precious to us, namely, the centrality of human rights in our daily lives and in global affairs. Second, we cannot maintain our historic self-confidence as a people if we generate public panic. Third, we cannot do our duty as citizens and patriots if we pursue an agenda that polarizes and divides our country. Next, we cannot be true to ourselves if we mistreat others. And finally, in the world at large we cannot lead if our leaders mislead.
You can't be a war president one day and claim to be a peace president the next, depending on the latest political polls. When our national security requires military action, John Kerry has already proven in Vietnam that he will not hesitate to act. And as a proven defender of our national security, John Kerry will strengthen the global alliance against terrorism while avoiding unnecessary wars.
Text Of Hillary Clinton's Speech
We’ve been through our share of challenges as Americans, from a Civil War to a Great Depression to world wars and more. Today we face a new threat. Being a senator from New York, I saw firsthand the devastation of 9-11. I visited Ground Zero right after we were attacked. I felt like I was standing at the gates of hell. I hope no American ever has to witness a sight like that again. That tragedy changed all of us. I know it changed me. And every day now, as a mother, as a senator, and as an American, I worry about whether we are acting as wisely as we can to protect our country and our people.Last week, the bipartisan 9-11 commission issued its report. It was a sober call to action that we ignore at our peril. John Kerry understands what’s at stake. We need to fully equip and train our firefighters, police officers and emergency medical technicians - our first responders in the event of a terrorist attack.
We need to secure our borders and our ports, as well as our chemical and nuclear plants. We need to reorganize our federal government to meet the new threats of these times. We need to make sure that homeland security is properly funded and that resources go to areas at greatest risk. We need to take care of our men and women in uniform who risked their lives for our country. These brave Americans deserve better. We need to increase our troop strength, raise their pay, and provide veterans, the National Guard, and Reserve with the benefits they’re entitled to.
Do you know what we need to meet those challenges? We need John Kerry. John Kerry is a serious man for a serious job.
Democrats and Republicans have very different and honestly held ideas on that choices we should make, rooted in fundamentally different views of how we should meet our common challenges at home and how we should play our role in the world. Democrats want to build an America of shared responsibilities and shared opportunities and more global cooperation, acting alone only when we must.We think the role of government is to give people the tools and conditions to make the most of their lives. Republicans believe in an America run by the right people, their people, in a world in which we act unilaterally when we can, and cooperate when we have to.
They think the role of government is to concentrate wealth and power in the hands of those who embrace their political, economic, and social views, leaving ordinary citizens to fend for themselves on matters like health care and retirement security. Since most Americans are not that far to the right, they have to portray us Democrats as unacceptable, lacking in strength and values. In other words, they need a divided America. But Americans long to be united. After 9/11, we all wanted to be one nation, strong in the fight against terror. The president had a great opportunity to bring us together under his slogan of compassionate conservatism and to unite the world in common cause against terror.
Instead, he and his congressional allies made a very different choice: to use the moment of unity to push America too far to the right and to walk away from our allies, not only in attacking Iraq before the weapons inspectors finished their jobs, but in withdrawing American support for the Climate Change Treaty, the International Court for war criminals, the ABM treaty, and even the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
Now they are working to develop two new nuclear weapons which they say we might use first. At home, the President and the Republican Congress have made equally fateful choices indeed. For the first time ever when America was on a war footing, there were two huge tax cuts, nearly half of which went to the top one percent. I’m in that group now for the first time in my life.
When I was in office, the Republicans were pretty mean to me. When I left and made money, I became part of the most important group in the world to them. At first I thought I should send them a thank you note-until I realized they were sending you the bill.
They protected my tax cuts while:
· Withholding promised funding for the Leave No Child Behind Act, leaving over 2 million children behind
· Cutting 140,000 unemployed workers out of job training
· 100,000 working families out of child care assistance
· 300,000 poor children out of after school programs
· Raising out of pocket healthcare costs to veterans
· Weakening or reversing important environmental advances for clean air and the preservation of our forests.
...
Everyone had to sacrifice except the wealthiest Americans, who wanted to do their part but were asked only to expend the energy necessary to open the envelopes containing our tax cuts. If you agree with these choices, you should vote to return them to the White House and Congress. If not, take a look at John Kerry, John Edwards and the Democrats.In this year’s budget, the White House wants to cut off federal funding for 88,000 uniformed police, including more than 700 on the New York City police force who put their lives on the line on 9/11. As gang violence is rising and we look for terrorists in our midst, Congress and the President are also about to allow the ten-year-old ban on assault weapons to expire. Our crime policy was to put more police on the streets and take assault weapons off the streets. It brought eight years of declining crime and violence. Their policy is the reverse, they’re taking police off the streets and putting assault weapons back on the streets. If you agree with their choices, vote to continue them. If not, join John Kerry, John Edwards and the Democrats in making America safer, smarter, and stronger.
On Homeland Security, Democrats tried to double the number of containers at ports and airports checked for Weapons of Mass Destruction. The one billion dollar cost would have been paid for by reducing the tax cut of 200,000 millionaires by five thousand dollars each. Almost all 200,000 of us would have been glad to pay 5,000 dollars to make the nearly 300 million Americans safer-but the measure failed because the White House and the Republican leadership in the House decided my tax cut was more important- If you agree with that choice, re-elect them. If not, give John Kerry and John Edwards a chance.
These policies have turned the projected 5.8 trillion dollar surplus we left-enough to pay for the baby boomers retirement-into a projected debt of nearly 5 trillion dollars, with a 400 plus billion dollar deficit this year and for years to come. How do they pay for it? First by taking the monthly surplus in Social Security payments and endorsing the checks of working people over to me to cover my tax cut. But it’s not enough. They are borrowing the rest from foreign governments, mostly Japan and China. Sure, they’re competing with us for good jobs but how can we enforce our trade laws against our bankers? If you think it’s good policy to pay for my tax cut with the Social Security checks of working men and women, and borrowed money from China, vote for them. If not, John Kerry’s your man.
We Americans must choose for President one of two strong men who both love our country, but who have very different worldviews: Democrats favor shared responsibility, shared opportunity, and more global cooperation. Republicans favor concentrated wealth and power, leaving people to fend for themselves and more unilateral action. I think we’re right for two reasons: First, America works better when all people have a chance to live their dreams. Second, we live in an interdependent world in which we can’t kill, jail, or occupy all our potential adversaries, so we have to both fight terror and build a world with more partners and fewer terrorists. We tried it their way for twelve years, our way for eight, and then their way for four more.
By the only test that matters, whether people were better off when we finished than when we started, our way works better-it produced over 22 million good jobs, rising incomes, and 100 times as many people moving out of poverty into the middle class. It produced more health care, the largest increase in college aid in 50 years, record home ownership, a cleaner environment, three surpluses in a row, a modernized defense force, strong efforts against terror, and an America respected as a world leader for peace, security and prosperity.
...
Here is what I know about John Kerry. During the Vietnam War, many young men-including the current president, the vice president and me-could have gone to Vietnam but didn’t. John Kerry came from a privileged background and could have avoided it too. Instead he said, send me.When they sent those swift-boats up the river in Vietnam, and told them their job was to draw hostile fire-to show the American flag and bait the enemy to come out and fight-John Kerry said, send me. When it was time to heal the wounds of war and normalize relations with Vietnam-and to demand an accounting of the POWs and MIAs we lost there-John Kerry said, send me.
When we needed someone to push the cause of inner-city kids struggling to avoid a life of crime, or to bring the benefits of high technology to ordinary Americans, or to clean the environment in a way that creates jobs, or to give small businesses a better chance to make it, John Kerry said send me.
Tonight my friends, I ask you to join me for the next 100 days in telling John Kerry’s story and promoting his plans. Let every person in this hall and all across America say to him what he has always said to America: Send Me. The bravery that the men who fought by his side saw in battle I’ve seen in the political arena. When I was President, John Kerry showed courage and conviction on crime, on welfare reform, on balancing the budget at a time when those priorities were not exactly a way to win a popularity contest in our party.
He took tough positions on tough problems. John Kerry knows who he is and where he’s going. He has the experience, the character, the ideas and the values to be a great President. In a time of change he has two other important qualities: his insatiable curiosity to understand the forces shaping our lives, and a willingness to hear the views even of those who disagree with him. Therefore his choices will be full of both conviction and common sense.
I would be remiss not to mention one of the most moving tributes to the fallen of 9/11 presented by a survivor and a violinist's rendition of Amazing Grace. It brought tears to my eyes.
Posted by David R. Remer at July 27, 2004 12:36 AMOf course, if “Amazing Grace” were performed at the Republican Convention it would be interpreted instantly as one more sign of religious zealotry. But such is the double-standard we operate under
(sigh).
I too was fairly impressed by the tightly scripted and disciplined line up tonight (not as vitriolic as I’d expected), but I wonder if those who aren’t already devoted partisans of the left will really be that impressed by Jimmy Carter lecturing on foreign policy and Bill Clinton’s complaints about divisive politics. Does anybody remember the records of THOSE two as president?
Posted by: Martin at July 27, 2004 12:49 AMMartin said, “Of course, if “Amazing Grace” were performed at the Republican Convention it would be interpreted instantly as one more sign of religious zealotry. But such is the double-standard we operate under(sigh).”
Martin, your defense of Republicans reminds me of an old 1950’s song that had the lyric, “Why is everybody always picking on me?”? Republicans are the dominant party in American government. Seems they should be leading, not on the defensive at every turn. Do they know something the polls aren’t yet showing?
[Comment deleted for critiquing the messenger, not the message]. WatchBlog Manager -
Posted by: Cman22 at July 27, 2004 01:04 AMJesus loves you, Cman.
[Thank you Martin, for your mature and responsible reply to Cman’s comment which failed a simple and plainly stated rule of participation. It is appreciated. Watchblog Manager]
Posted by: Martin at July 27, 2004 01:06 AMAnd let’s none of us fail to appreciate the absolute surrealistic beauty of a scene in which Bill Clinton (yes, I said Bil Clinton) praises John Kerry for voluntarily serving in the military.
Remember Clinton’s attitude and remarks when anybody dared raise that issue to compare him with Bush 1 in 92?
Clinton’s point, apparently, was to favorably contrast Kerry with Bush on this issue. Basically, Clinton is saying that anybody who serves in the National Guard is equilevent to a draft dodger like himself. I wonder how many votes from present and retired National Guardsmen just went down the drain. Clinton just raised a big middle finger to all them.
Posted by: Martin at July 27, 2004 01:22 AMSorry, Martin, I don’t see that implication at all.
Posted by: David R. Remer at July 27, 2004 01:36 AMI loved all the speeches. What was the soul song the woman sang after Clinton’s speech? It was awesome! Is the DNC going to release a soundtrack?
Hillary in 2012!
Hillary will never be President of this nation. It is just not in the cards. She has universal health care baggage, only an average appearance, and a shrill and somewhat monotone speaking style. Given 50 or more million Americans who need pepto bismol whenever her face appears, I just don’t see it happening.
The first woman President will likely have Clinton’s speech delivery qualities, Truman’s sense of responsibility, Ted Kennedy’s length of public service, Arnold Schwarzeneggar’s name recognition, and a centerfold body that will make southern white male’s drool. And even then, she will need a decorated war record or world peace to break out in order to have a chance.
I am not saying that is how it should be, just how it is and will likely be in 2012.
Posted by: David R. Remer at July 27, 2004 05:02 AMDavid:
I expected the Democrats to put on a great and wondrous show. I expect the Republicans to do the same. And the outcome will be that those already voting for Kerry will be even more likely to vote for Kerry, and those already voting for Bush will be even more likely to vote for Bush.
I expect to see a bounce after each convention—the height and duration of the bounce is the most telling issue.
The Democrats are doing a smart thing by repackaging themselves as less vitriolic and less confrontational. Those who have been watching them know its a dramatic change, but others tuning in for the first time might see them as being reasonable and calm.
The Dems do have problems though, the major ones being their divided stance on Iraq (should we or shouldnt we have gone in, and should we or shouldnt we pull out fast) as well as a growing economy.
They have to show failure on behalf of the Republicans, but there are increasing signs of success that Repubs can point to. It will be interesting to see if Democrats can “position” the Repubs better than the Repubs can position the Dems. Having first shot at it might help, but Repubs will certainly know what they need to do at their convention to combat what the Dems are doing now.
Posted by: joebagodonuts at July 27, 2004 07:51 AMDavid—
Despite my better self I thoroughly enjoyed the Convention last night; Clinton was on his game. Say what you will about the man, but in his heart beast the blood of a true American patriot. The gave a speech last night that encapsulated the failures of the Bush Presidency without alienating the electorate as a whole. It was beautify crafted and masterfully delivered by one of the most intelligent men (Monicgate aside) to ever hold the office of President. My wife loves him and would vote for him again if he could run. And after last nights speech so would I.
About Hillary, perhaps not President, but Vice President.
jbod, the Dem’s are going to have Iraq and the spend and borrow Republicans as to major arguments to use to convince swing voters that it is time for a change. I even think they now may be successful. They problem I see is changing one set of weaknesses for another. But, the people will get a change to some extent. And that is what they are going to sell.
Posted by: David R. Remer at July 27, 2004 11:17 AMV. Edward, Clinton’s ability to distillate the complex into the simple to understand, is his genius. He made the choices facing Democrats and left leaning independents and some swing voters, so very clear and easy to understand.
I heard someone joke last night on MSNBC about Clinton running for Secretary General of “the World”. I think the joke is on the joker. He could easily, under the right circumstances, become the Secretary General of the U.N. and in all likelihood, be one of the best the U.N. has ever had.
Of course, the bar is not very high yet.
Posted by: David R. Remer at July 27, 2004 11:23 AMMartin, Clinton’s point was, in part “Kerry is a better man than most”. He wasn’t a hypocrite at all about that, nor was he insulting members of the National Guard any more than he was insulting himself.
One can praise one person without insulting another, you know.
-Cf
Posted by: Christopher Fahey at July 27, 2004 12:56 PM> And the outcome will be that those already
> voting for Kerry will be even more likely to
> vote for Kerry, and those already voting for
> Bush will be even more likely to vote for Bush.
This may be true, but I think the Democrats are cleverly aiming beyond that. I think the overwhelming focus of the Convention is to attract (a) those who have not made up their minds and (b) those who are leaning towards a third party. The other typical objectives of a Convention were pretty well settled well in advance of the convention - most people’s minds are already made up, and the Democratic base is energized almost like never before. All that is left is to seal the deal for those on the fence, to show them that Kerry is a viable alternative. They already don’t really want to vote for Bush.
It was a great move to use Clinton, who can kill with kindness like no other leader, as the attack dog. His summary of the ineptitude of the Bush Administration was eloquent and compelling. My guess is that we won’t see much more negativity after this.
The big question is whether or not the Republican Convention will (a) attack Kerry mercilessly, or (b) paint a positive vision of a second Bush term. Or both. My guess is that it will be largely anti-Kerry attacks, but we’ll see.
-Cf
Posted by: Christopher Fahey at July 27, 2004 01:07 PMCf, I think the anti-Kerry attacks are the only thing these guys have. I haven’t heard anything else from them lately… Except, “Be afraid. Suspect your neighbors. Only President Bush can save you. Booga-booga-booga!!”
Posted by: American Pundit at July 28, 2004 06:50 AMThe only positve proposition the Republicans can put forward is: Give Bush another 4 years and he will do his best to do better next time around. A real confidence builder, eh? They have little choice but to stay on the defensive and attack Kerry and the ALL other parties (save Nader) with everything they have. If they can’t paint Kerry as worse than Bush, Bush hasn’t a prayer. Note the strategy, we give you two choices, one worse than the other, so vote for the less worse!
HA!
David and others:
Its incredible to me that you guys can say what you say without adding smiley faces to it. You are simply taking the charge aimed against the Dems and trying to turn it around. You did it with the whole flip flop thing——your argument was “kerry isnt a flip flopper…BUSH IS!!!”
The Republicans are in position to counter the claims of the Democrats. Dems claim the economy is bad—-the Republicans can point to job growth and many other economic indicators to show the economy is growing. Dems claim Iraq is in a quagmire—-the Repubs can show all the positives about how Iraq is moving forward (not of course that its perfect, but that its moving forward steadily).
The Repubs have done a good job of painting Kerry as a flip flopping, nuanced, compassless politician (matters not if its true or not, since its a caricature). The Dems are trying to paint Bush as having done all the wrong things—someone who has squandered Amnerica’s good will etc (again, matters not if its true if they can get the people to believe it).
I see the Bush issue as being changable—-meaning that as the economy and the situation in Iraq improves—people will see the claims as being false. Now, the opposite (or should i say “flip”?) of that is that if things dont improve, then the charges can stick. But, in Kerry’s situation, he cant undo his past votes etc. He will have more trouble undoing his nuanced statements.
I hope you guys are representative of the Democratic mindset, because if you are, Dems are truly underestimating what will happen over the next several months. Allow me to remind you that these very same thoughts were going on 4 years ago, and that race ended up in a photo finish.
Posted by: joebagodonuts at July 29, 2004 03:09 PMjbod, I have seen and still see the Administration and GOP ‘project’ their own faults or worries upon their opponents. If their opponents throw it right back at them, I fail to see why that should surprise! The Bush administration has been weak on defending our borders and run around accusing the Dem’s of being weak on defense. Who is kidding who, here? I for one am not fooled.
That said, it remains to be seen how Kerry intends to (in hard realistic numbers) counter the right’s charge of tax and spend, despite the fact that the right is charging and spending our children’s future earnings.
Posted by: David R. Remer at July 29, 2004 07:29 PMI see the Bush issue as being changable
Me too! Vote for Kerry.
No, vote for Nader if you live in a state that is going to the red anyway. Otherwise, vote for Kerry. And let’s not forget the congressional races. It the people want a real change, they have to make in the Senate and House as well, otherwise, changing President’s will have little consequence regarding changing the course of the nation and the priorities it attends to.
Posted by: David R. Remer at August 1, 2004 05:33 PM